WHEN do we DISFELLOWSHIP ?

[fccool]

Quote:

Should we disfellowship those who no longer believe Mrs White is a Bible-level prophetess?

Should we disfellowship the Progressive Adventists who no longer believe in a Investigative Judgment or Heavenly Millennium?

And what do we do with the many who are not Trinitarians?

Could we tolerate those and still allow them to worship with us? Or must they abide by the "testing truths"?

I am not talking about those who live in open violation of God's Law.

And what do we do with those who no longer believe "the SDA church is the ONLY TRUE church of Revelation"? as you promised when baptized?

Could we TOLERATE? Or should we DISFELLOWSHIP?

Disfellowship ,as it is practiced today, is ironically stems from a Catholic church doctrine of excommunication. Disfellowship as a concept practiced today does not appear in the Bible at all, neither does the "membership" as it appears today. Nobody voted members in. People merely recognized someone to be someone who is practicing religious ideals in agreement, or who does not. It's really as simple as that.

Catholic church came along and said, NO... anyone who does not hold "membership" in the church will not go to heaven, but is fit for hell. So, they used the "disfellowship" doctrine to cram a whole lot of doctrine and maintain ecclesiastical power. They said - "If you don't agree, you are out!". Ecclesiastical power decided.

There are are reasons for disciplinary actions by congregation in the Bible... and not believing E.G. While as a prophet is not one of these. Neither not believing IJ doctrine or Trinitarian view of God.

The primary reason for "disfellowshiping" was actually fornication, or rejecting and adamantly arguing against the base Christian precepts like the divinity of Christ and etc. The act of "disfellowshiping" was to merely maintain order. The early church was not a bunch of people in the pews with only the pastor speaking. It was about voicing your own understanding and objections. Everyone got engaged in a conversation. That's why Paul would limit the women's voice, because they tend to speak too long, breaking down that order.

Disfellowshipping was essentially saying that "you are not welcome in our home for a while, until you learn to behave more civilly, be a better example to other, or willing to contribute and benefit to the community properly". It was a corporate decision. It was not decided by elders, or Clergy (there were no clergy). And it was not because one disagreed on some point, like whether or not some contemporary voice is a prophet. These issues were a matter of discussion and disagreement.

[fccool]

So, reading the above, I'd like to ask you a question as to what would disfellowship in the modern Adventist church even mean outside of the clerical pen stroke? Are you advocating shunning the members in question, because that was not the mode of disfellowship.

For you to properly practice disfellowshipping, you would actually have to throw out most of the Catholic-derived traditions, like docile people sitting in the pew and considering it church. You would have to come back to the home-based church model. Then, the idea of disfellowshipping will have some sort of meaning.

But, if anyone can still come to the church and do virtually anything they can before the disfellowshipping, then what's the point? Does membership really mean anything outside of a statistical record? Does membership save you? Does lack of membership decrease your salvation chances? If it does not, then it's merely a very Catholic-like mechanism of enforcing a certain dogma.

[LynnDel]

Brief foray into a side issue: I doubt that women's length of speech was the problem here, since men don't have any problem holding forth themselves. Didn't Paul cause Eutychus to fall out the window by putting him to sleep with his long speech? More likely it is that men view women's speech patterns as confusing, because we, in general, tend to be more tangential than men when speaking, having the capability of thinking of many things all at once, and when we don't stick to a main topic, men get frustrated. No expert here, just observation.

LD

[fccool]

By speaking long, I meant about the tendency to jump around and forget what the topic was in the first place. I'm generalizing of course. I've met plenty of men who do that too and drive me crazy doing it :)

[Woody]

By speaking long, I meant about the tendency to jump around and forget what the topic was in the first place. I'm generalizing of course. I've met plenty of men who do that too and drive me crazy doing it

Yeah - them women have driven me crazy also. But you can't live with them and you can't live without 'em. They are kinda a 'necessary evil'. No offense intended.

[JoeMo]

Quote from fccool:

"Disfellowship ,as it is practiced today, is ironically stems from a Catholic church doctrine of excommunication. Disfellowship as a concept practiced today does not appear in the Bible at all, neither does the "membership" as it appears today. Nobody voted members in. People merely recognized someone to be someone who is practicing religious ideals in agreement, or who does not. It's really as simple as that."

Excellent point, fc. My take on disfellowship is it should only be considered only when the person is overtly disrpupting official church functions or leading other members into open rebellion against the biblical law of God; and maybe - JUST MAYBE - if they are inciting disunity in the church. I say maybe because sometimes the church just might need a little shaking up.

That being said, I'm not a big fan of general rules. Each case should be considered on its own merit.

[Woody]

The churches that have no membership seem to do just fine.

[fccool]

Quote:

Excellent point, fc. My take on disfellowship is it should only be considered only when the person is overtly disrpupting official church functions or leading other members into open rebellion against the biblical law of God; and maybe - JUST MAYBE - if they are inciting disunity in the church. I say maybe because sometimes the church just might need a little shaking up.

From purely Biblical perspective, the concept was to maintain certain Moral Fidelity. That's why the guidelines were set up, like confront the person with other member who would be concerned about behavior (not in a critical way like "you should stop doing this"), if that does not work bring in the elders, and if that does not work, then the entire church simply closes the door at your face for a while. But, such practice is impossible today in the way that a church is constructed as a hierarchical concert-sermon experience.

When someone is confronted with "disfellowshipping" threat... so what? It's only relevant to someone employed by the church, in which case they loose their job, like the people who were convinced that evolution is true. But many of them coming back, participating in discussions in non-disruptive way, and there's nothing that church can do about it given the present structure.

I've known plenty of people who did just that and it made 0 difference in terms of what they believed. It only made them feel a sense of distrust and animosity that resulted in them participating less, and confiding in their church friends less. I know that criticism is difficult to take, but the way many churches today dish it out is atrocious and unreasonable :)

[JoeMo]

I hear you, fc. Unfortunately, it's not just people who work directly for the denomination that lose their jobs when they fall out of favor with the church. People who work for affiliate organizations (schools, hospitals, nursing care facilities, etc.) also lose their jobs. That's just plain religious persecution. Does that sound like something Jesus would do?

[M. T. Cross]

Hey Um - you missed disfellowshipping for not paying tithe. That gotta be an official rule too ya know.

[fccool]

Quote:

I hear you, fc. Unfortunately, it's not just people who work directly for the denomination that lose their jobs when they fall out of favor with the church. People who work for affiliate organizations (schools, hospitals, nursing care facilities, etc.) also lose their jobs. That's just plain religious persecution. Does that sound like something Jesus would do?

It's generally because of the lack of the pro-bono mentality that exists at the highest levels of the hierarchy. Here's a good reflection of such mentality:

http://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1974/November/adventist-hospitals-should-be-just-that

In terms of evangelistic thinking, it's not merely good enough to feed, cloth, heal, and etc. You have to convert. If you heal, cloth, heal, but don't convert... then you are "prostituting the work that Lord given us".

It seems like prostituting is not ok, but to receive prostitution in exchange for services is perfectly fine :)

[Naomi]

I am going to play the devil's advocate here ... it doesn't matter who you work for if you fall out of favor with the powers that be you will usually loose your job. Or, at best, suffer professional consequences. That's life!

[OzarkWoman]

Hey Um - you missed disfellowshipping for not paying tithe. That gotta be an official rule too ya know.

You mean that I will be disfellowshipped for not paying my tithe? Honestly?

[JoeMo]

Naomi,

I agree that "if you fall out of favor with the powers that be you will usually loose your job. Or, at best, suffer professional consequences." That's the way the world works. That doesn't mean it's just. But when falling out of favor has nothing to do with your competence or your job-related cooperation with management, it is outright religious persecution - period.

Of course - one would be naive to believe that either the world of the denomination was fair.

[JoeMo]

OW,

It would be a harsh church that would disfellowship someone for not paying tithe; especially when the church has never (to my knowledge) ever defined what a tithe is 10% of. Gross pay? Net pay? Net pay minus required expenditures (like room and board)? The OT says one should pay 10% of their increase. Who defines "increase"? How would the church be able to audit your "increase" to determine whether or not you had paid a fair tithe?.

Scripture says the Lord loves a cheerful giver. It also says we rob the Lord of tithes and offerings. Most churches would probably agree that tithes and offerings are between you and God.

Don't let anyone here on this board or at your local church define for you what your relationship with God should look like. Go directly to God; and you and He can work it out.

Blessings, JoeMo

[M. T. Cross]

Originally Posted By: EmptyCross

Hey Um - you missed disfellowshipping for not paying tithe. That gotta be an official rule too ya know.

You mean that I will be disfellowshipped for not paying my tithe? Honestly?

I was.

To be clear however, I recently found out that it is not a valid reason to kick someone out. My church had almost every other reason to kick me out, but the only time I was ever approached about anything was when I quit paying tithe. Then I got a very passive aggressive letter in the mail suggesting that the importance of my relationship with Christ was very high to me so I should start paying tithe. I refused and I got kicked out.

[Woody]

Quote:

I refused and I got kicked out.

Whether you pay tithe or not - is confidential. The treasurer is not allowed to share that info with any one. Not even the Board. In order for you to be kicked out - the Board would have to take action.

The Church Manual clearly states that "stealing from God" is not a reason for disfellowship. The quotes are for me. LOL. But seriously - the manual states that you can not be disfellowshipped for not paying tithe (stealing from God).

The 8th commandment - (Thou shalt not steal) is the ONLY commandment that is exempt from your obedience however in regards to membership.

So - mind your p's and q's.

[M. T. Cross]

Quote:

I refused and I got kicked out.

Whether you pay tithe or not - is confidential. The treasurer is not allowed to share that info with any one. Not even the Board. In order for you to be kicked out - the Board would have to take action.

The Church Manual clearly states that "stealing from God" is not a reason for disfellowship. The quotes are for me. LOL. But seriously - the manual states that you can not be disfellowshipped for not paying tithe (stealing from God).

The 8th commandment - (Thou shalt not steal) is the ONLY commandment that is exempt from your obedience however in regards to membership.

So - mind your p's and q's.

If only the politics were that simple eh? Like people minding the rules that they agree to mind. Oddly enough these were some of the most legalistic people I have ever met

[Woody]

Quote:

Oddly enough these were some of the most legalistic people I have ever met

Legalists are the worst offenders. During my times on the Church Board - I've had to pull out the Manual many a time.

[Jeannieb43]

I agree with Woody. Whether or not you are paying tithe, or how much tithe you pay, are both CONFIDENTIAL. The church treasurer is not allowed to give out that information to ANYONE. I've known some pastors who made it a point to find out; but I've known other church pastors who were just as firm in NOT knowing which of their members was (or wasn't) paying tithe.

Many many years ago when I was on the faculty of one of our SDA senior colleges, one of my colleagues was "called on the carpet" for not paying tithe. I wasn't as strong in my 'personhood' then as I am now; but if that happened today, I would tell my colleague to "take out the Church Manual" and show those nosy people that they have no business going there.

[it turns out that this was "back in the day" when female teachers were paid less than male teachers for the same positions, and since she was an unmarried female, the wage she received was not enough for her to live on. For that reason, her parents (who themselves were well off) paid her tithe for her, to their own church back home.]

If anybody tries to say nothing has ever changed over the years in our church organization, here's an example to the contrary.

[nuff sed]

Tithe-paying is not a "Test of Fellowship" in the Seventh-day Adventist Church....................................except for those who are employed by the organization and are supposed to be examples. Nuff Sed

[Umfundize]

I would like to hear direct opines regarding the original, first post.

The Church Manual suggests that those whose names are considered by the Nominating Committee for offices such as ELDER, ought to be tithe-payers. They simply ask the Treasurer to say yes or no, or ask the nominee if he/she perhaps send the tithe directly to the Conference or to some or other SDA support ministry.

Should members be disfellowshipped if they changed their minds on the original 17 requirements on the Baptismal Certificate? THAT is what Adventist Alternative brought up and what the talk is about!

[Woody]

The answer to your question is no.

UNLESS - the person is actively campaigning against the beliefs of the church.

[phkrause]

Tithe-paying is not a "Test of Fellowship" in the Seventh-day Adventist Church....................................except for those who are employed by the organization and are supposed to be examples. Nuff Sed

[phkrause]

The answer to your question is no.

UNLESS - the person is actively campaigning against the beliefs of the church.